In re Ohio Criminal Sentencing Statute Cases

The Ohio Supreme Court on May 3rd. published a fairly lengthy opinion “disposing of currently pending appeals and certified conflicts” based on its decision in State v. Foster back in July 2005. The document posted on the Court’s website was done so summarizing in manuscript form in the interest of disseminating information to the public expeditiously, and is subject to revision when the final version is released.

The judgments of appeals courts in 146 cases were reversed and remanded back to their trial courts for resentencing, including:

From Hamilton County:

• State v. Ferguson, 2005 Ohio 0339 (App. No. C-040114 on proposition 2)
• State v. Walker, 2005 Ohio 0374 (App. No. C-040202)
• State v. Carson, 2005 Ohio 0613 (App. No.C-040042 on proposition 2)
• State v. Bell, 2005 Ohio 0614 (App. No.C-040488 on proposition 2)
• State v. Krois, 2005 Ohio 1207 (App. No. C-040543)
• State v. Harris, 2005 Ohio 1583 (App. No. C-040598 on propositions 2 & 3)
• State v. Terry, 2005 Ohio 1651 (App. No. C-040261 on propositions 1 & 2)
• State v. Deters, 2005 Ohio 1752 (App. No. C-010645 on proposition 2)
• State v. Covington,2005 Ohio 1840 (App. No.C-040429 on proposition 2)
• State v. Stonestreet, 2005 Ohio 1913 (App. No. C-040264 on proposition 3)
  

From Butler County:

• State v. Todd, 2005 Ohio 1117 (App. No. CA-2004-06-123)
• State v. Farley, 2005 Ohio 1164 (App. No. CA-2004-04-085)
• State v. Sebring, 2005 Ohio 1200 (App. No. CA-2004-08-195)
• State v. Calhoun, 2005 Ohio 1242 (App. No. CA-2004-08-192)


• State v. Mason, 2005 Ohio 1303 (App. No. CA-2004-06-154 and App. No. CA-2004-06-164 on proposition 7)


• State v. Coffeen, 2005 Ohio 1321 (App. No. CA-2004-08-211)

From Clermont County:

• State v. Chewning, 2005 Ohio 0185 (App. No. CA2004-01-002 on proposition 3)
• State v. Montgomery 05 Ohio 1175 (App. No. CA2004-06-047 )
• State v. Wright, 2005 Ohio 1722 (App. No. CA2004-08-061)

Three cases from Hamilton County were affirmed in part and reversed in part, being remanded for resentencing:

• State v. Bruce, 2005 Ohio 0391 (App No. C-040421)
• State v. Montgomery, 2005 Ohio 0498 (App. No. C-040190)
• State v. Roberts, 2005 Ohio 1766 (App .No. C-040575 and C-050005)

Portions of the judgments in State v. Hobbs, 2005 Ohio 2220 (Ham. Co. App. No. C-030915), related to propositions of law, were reversed and their appeals dismissed in part as having been “improvidently accepted pursuant to the rule relating to ineffective assistance of counsel set forth in Strickland
v. Washington (1984), 466 U.S. 668

Discretionary appeals were accepted in 46 cases and the judgments of the courts of appeals reversed and remanded for resentencing, including:

From Hamilton County:

· State v. Ostenkamp, 2005 Ohio 2031 (App. No. C-040371 on proposition 1)

· State v. Sullivan, 2005 Ohio 2285 (App. No. C-040186 on proposition 1)

· State v. Dickens, 2005 Ohio 2297 (App. No. C-040768 and C-040774 on proposition 1 and 2 )

State v. Royals, 2005 Ohio 0215 (App. No. C-050309)

From Butler County

· State v. Perkins, 2005 Ohio 0226 (App. No. CA2005-02-036)

From Clermont County

· State v. Arthur, 2005 Ohio 2221 (App. No. CA2005-04-028)

Certified conflicts recognized by the Court in a total of 14 cases were answered by the opinion, including:

From Hamilton County:

· State v. Bruce, 2005 Ohio 0499 , (App. No. C-040421)

· State v. Montgomery, 2005 Ohio 0586 (App. No. C-040190)

From Butler County:

· State v. Farley, 2005 Ohio 1267 (App. No. CA2004-04-085)

· State v. Todd, 2005 Ohio 1268 (App. No. CA2004-06-123)

· State v. Combs, 2005 Ohio 1301 (App. No. CA2000-03-047)

· State v. Piesciuk, 2005 Ohio 0065 (App. No. CA2004-03-055)

Beginning with the passage of Senate Bill 2 in 1996, and continuing through Booker, Foster, & Mathis, Ohio sentencing guidelines have been, periodically, in a perhaps timely state of reform. Additional background and the Sentencing Commission's positions throughout this evolution is posted on its website, including two helpful reports: “Judicial Decision Making After Blakely & Booker,” and “Felony Sentencing in Ohio After Foster”